|
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
|
Author
|
Topic: New 70mm Print of "West Side Story"!!!
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-26-2006 01:18 AM
Can mag and DTS live on the same print? I mean, of course they can, but has it ever been done?
And also, has Dolby ever toyed with the idea of laying down their digital stream on 70mm (I'm cynical enough to imagine they have already patented or whatever they do to lay claim to the spaces in between the sprocket holes). No reason why Dolby couldn't be done other than the cost of getting hardware manufactured....hardware that you KNOW is going to way more expensive than the little DTS reader.
Which leads me to the last question: how does that actually work? How can they claim a certain area on the print as their own? Seems pretty cheeky to me -- that space has been there since the beginning of time. How is all of a sudden that it belongs do Dolby, I mean Ray wasn't standing on a mountain top and heard the cinema gods promise him that space as belonging to him and his people, did he? Or does Dolby think the have Eminent Domain over anything and everything they want on a piece of film? So in what sense do the sprocket non-holes for want of a better phrase, in what sense can it "belong" to anyone. I mean if some company wants to put cue tones in there or picture of their great aunt or something and they can get a lab to do it, what's Dolby gonna do about it? Huh?! ![[Mad]](mad.gif) Damn, now I've worked myself into a rant. Let's change the subject.
So while we are asking questions, isn't the SR-D designation mean it's a print that carries Dolby's digital track AND SR analog tracks? So if Dolby were to put it's digital stream on a 70mm print, you wouldn't call it Dolby SR-D, right? It would just be Dolby Digital? or would it?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-26-2006 03:14 AM
quote: Frank Angel
Can mag and DTS live on the same print? I mean, of course they can, but has it ever been done?
Cannot be done; the timecode is in the same position as one of the inbound stripes, so you'd have to remove that stripe, and loose one track. I'm not sure which channel is carried on that stripe. The DTS track is narrower than the mag stripe, so I suppose that, in theory, it might be possible to apply a very narrow stripe, as was done with 35mm (and 16mm) mag-opt prints, but this has never been done. I don't know if it was ever considered; at least you'd have a wider stripe to start with than on 35mm.
quote: Frank Angel
And also, has Dolby ever toyed with the idea of laying down their digital stream on 70mm (I'm cynical enough to imagine they have already patented or whatever they do to lay claim to the spaces in between the sprocket holes). No reason why Dolby couldn't be done other than the cost of getting hardware manufactured....hardware that you KNOW is going to way more expensive than the little DTS reader.
Yes, but it did not use the space between the sprocket holes; I can't remember where it would have been placed, but in was on a continuous strip of film, not the area between holes. It was a really odd system; the film area was continuous, but the data recording was not, there were four blocks of data to each five-perf frame, with clear film between them, so the data format was exactly the same as on 35mm. I don't know if they ever actually built any equipment and tried it, but the proposal was made that it could be done in the future, if Digital sound on 70mm prints was ever required. Dolby's attitude seemed to be that Dolby Digital sound largely removed the need for 70mm prints (I heard words to this effect from two Dolby staff, but I don't know if it was official company policy). I think it was just an idea to keep on the shelf in case 70mm ever made a major comeback, which they did not expect it to do.
quote: Frank Angel
Which leads me to the last question: how does that actually work? How can they claim a certain area on the print as their own?
Can they? They can publish details, and patent, the idea of using that space on the film for something, but I doubt they could actually stop somebody putting something else there. I believe their patent does include using the area between the perforations on the non-track edge as well. It would be unwise to do so, as that would make the print incompatible with Dolby Digital sound, but let's say I came up with a system for silent films, where I used that space to record some sort of signal to vary the speed of the projector in different parts of the film. Since it's a silent film there would be no need for a Dolby Digital track. As long as the data I recorded on the film was not using Dolby's format, let's say I just put a single dot, of varying size to indicate varying speed, I doubt that Dolby could stop me. They have defined a standard, as with the position of the analogue track, but I doubt if they actually 'own' it. Dolby were't the first to think of recording a signal using the sace between the perforations; Vitasound recorded a white line in this area to control the gain of amplifiers.
quote: Frank Angel
So while we are asking questions, isn't the SR-D designation mean it's a print that carries Dolby's digital track AND SR analog tracks? So if Dolby were to put it's digital stream on a 70mm print, you wouldn't call it Dolby SR-D, right? It would just be Dolby Digital? or would it?
The SR-D name seems to have become largely obsolete; they seem to just use the term 'Dolby Digital' now, both on film prints and other media, e.g. DVDs. When the first Laserdiscs were released with Dolby Digital tracks they labeled them 'Dolby AC-3', after the encoding system. Dolby seem to be quite fond of using different names for the same thingin different applications, e.g. the 'Dolby Stereo' Vs. 'Dolby Pro-logic' thing for professional and domestic matrix encoded four channel sound systems.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-26-2006 04:41 PM
quote: Stephen Furley
Cannot be done; the timecode is in the same position as one of the inbound stripes, so you'd have to remove that stripe, and loose one track.
I don't know Stephen....DTS was able to squeezed their miniscule track in the space between the image and the regular analog track on 35mm prints, surely there is at least that much of a septum, probably more, between any of the inside mag tracks and the image or between one of the inside tracks and the sprockets holes, so there would be no need to reduce the mag stripe width at all, at least not by any significant amount -- not like the compromise that was needed for 4trk mag/opt prints (basically needing to cut the optical track in half). I can't imagine DTS can't live in peace with mag on 70mm prints without any major changes in specs.
quote: Stephen Furley
Can they? They can publish details, and patent, the idea of using that space on the film for something, but I doubt they could actually stop somebody putting something else there.
The only reason I say this is because I recall on more than one occasion John P. referring to the space as "Dolby's area" or something to that affect which gave the impression that they had some exclusive rights to it. Although it didn't make much scense to me either. I should have asked him.
John...you around?
quote:
Dolby seem to be quite fond of using different names for the same thingin different applications,
Yah, pretty soon they are going to run out of alphabet letters. ![[Smile]](smile.gif) And I always thought at AC-3 designation was unnecessarily obtuse and didn't impart any useful information.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-27-2006 02:28 AM
quote: Robert Throop
I remember reading a paper in a SMPTE Journal from the fifties describing the transparency of mag tracks to IR light. Of course the track can't be Cyan.
I'm not sure how transparent to infrared the oxide would be; the stripe on film is quite thick, much more so than the coting on magnetic tape. Would it be possible to read a timecode track through the oxide, using an infrared source? Of course, the DTS reader uses red light; at least the 35mm one does, I assume that the 70mm one is the same, so even if it was possible then the readers would have to be modified or replaced, and the 70mm prints would need silver in the DTS tracks; the processing machines would require fitting with the track re-development system which the industry has been trying to get rid of for years.
quote: Frank Angel
I don't know Stephen....DTS was able to squeezed their miniscule track in the space between the image and the regular analog track on 35mm prints, surely there is at least that much of a septum, probably more, between any of the inside mag tracks and the image or between one of the inside tracks and the sprockets holes, so there would be no need to reduce the mag stripe width at all, at least not by any significant amount -- not like the compromise that was needed for 4trk mag/opt prints (basically needing to cut the optical track in half). I can't imagine DTS can't live in peace with mag on 70mm prints without any major changes in specs.
The DTS track doesn't need to be very wide, certainly not as wide as it is on 70mm, but putting it very close to the picture isn't desirable, if the plate is slightly over-cut then you see timecode on the masking. Another problem with DTS on 35mm, which wouldn't apply to 70mm, is that the DTS track is also very close to the analogue track. If the soundhead is mis-aligned, or the track is mis-printed, then you can hear timecode. When I ran 'Schlindler's list' we had this problem on just one reel, and had to mask down the slit slightly. Of course, 70mm DTS overdoes it, you don't need as much space between picture and track as this has, nor does the track need to be so wide. Let me re-phrase what I wrote; 70mm magnetic and DTS cannot co-exist, and both be usable**, on the same print, as the systems are currently specified. Of course, you could modify the specification of either, or both, systems to make them compatible. You can do anything you like if you change the specs. If you modified the mag system only then you would need to significantly reduce the width of one of the inboard sripes to uncover the DTS track in its present position; I don't have the figures to hand at the moment to work out by how much. If the existing heads were used on the projectors then the narrow stripe would cause uneven head wear, which in turn could cause problems with 'normal' magnetic prints. The alternative would be to make different head assemblies for each type of print, as was done for 16mm in the '50s - '70s; an expensive option just to play the occasional mag-DTS print.
If you were to modify only the DTS system, and leave the stripes as they are, then I think you would need to reduce the frame width slightly; I don't think there's any room to squeeze in a DTS track otherwise. The stripes often overlap the printed frame area slightly, and they extend right to the edges of the film. I don't think there's even room between the stripe and the perforations, and it wouldn't be reliable, given that stripe is sometimes somewhat irregular, and that the DTS track would have to be even narrower than it is on 35mm. The reliability of the system was something which DTS were very concerned about when they designed the 70mm system; I can't imagine them wanting to compromise it now.
If you really needed to put both systems onto the same print then the best way of doing it would probably be to reduce the width of one stripe slightly, and then move the DTS track into the availanle space. That would mean modifying DTS code recorders, striping machines, possibly printers, and DTS readers, and possibly mag head assemblies in theatres. Would it really be worth it?
The only other soultion I can think of is to use smaller perforations to make room for a re-located DTS track; Fox-holes on 70mm? That would need modifications to the DTS equipment, plus new sprockets, and new punches and dies for the perforators; I really don't think that's likely to happen.
Of course, if you modified the DTS system then you'd still need to be able to read existing prints with the timecode track in the original position.
I won't suggest putting the timecode between the perforations .
At present, there are almost certainly more titles avaiable in 70mm mag than there are in DTS. Any new films which may be releasedd in 70mm are likely to be DTS; the odd print struck of an old film could be either.
Adding DTS readers to existing mag equipped 70mm projectors is simple, and not that expensive, as is putting a DTS processor in the sound rack. Haaving the small number of theatres which can show 70mm equipped for both formats really seems to be much cheaper and simpler than putting both formats on one print. They need to be dual-equipped anyway if they are going to be able to play all existing prints.
** I did once see a 70mm print where the DTS code had been striped over; I can't remember the title. I'm not sure if all the prints were printed with DTS, and then some were striped to create a dual-inventory, of if the print had originally been run as DTS, and had then been striped for re-use at mag-only theatres.
[ 08-27-2006, 05:25 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Furley ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-28-2006 08:39 AM
Michael, it wasn't any of those. I've only ever seen 'Vertigo' on 35, I've never seen 'Lord Jim', and while I have seen 'Lawrence of Arabia' on 70mm the last time must be over twenty years ago now, long before DTS was introduced. 'Lawrence' is also the only film that I've ever shown in 70mm, or at least half of it, I was operating one machine. Someone was taken ill, and I got a 'phone call asking if I would do it. That would have been around 1976 ish.
It was something where I went up to the box after the show. I have seen 'My Fair Lady' on 70mm, and I think it was a new print, but it was a long time ago; when was DTS introduced on 70mm?
I'm still on the Loew's Jersey mailing list, and, by co-incidence I've just had an e-mail from them to say that they're running 'vertigo' and 'Rope' on the 23rd of September, and 'Rear Window' the previous day.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 08-29-2006 02:29 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
My bet is My Fair Lady. That was a transitional film where they experimented with the DTS70 thing...a few test prints were in DTS but the bulk were Mag. Vertigo were all DTS.
One of restoration producers as well as a source at DTS informed me a few years ago while researching another project that only a reel or two of "My Fair Lady" was tested in 70mm-DTS.
As for "Vertigo," yes, all of the prints were in DTS. However, according to the asset manager at Universal, one of the prints was subsequently mag-striped.
quote: Stephen Furley
It was something where I went up to the box after the show. I have seen 'My Fair Lady' on 70mm, and I think it was a new print, but it was a long time ago; when was DTS introduced on 70mm?
Here's a link to a list of the 70mm-DTS titles.
(If it isn't one of the following titles then perhaps it was a Cinema Digital Sound title, rather than DTS, that you are thinking of. My own research of this subject, by the way, yielded a few differences, including some premiere date discrepancies, the addition of "The Greatest Story Ever Told," the exclusion of "Mulan" and, of course, the question of whether "My Fair Lady" was tested in its entirety.)
http://www.in70mm.com/library/70mm_in/dts.htm
quote:
My Fair Lady
12.09.1994
Ziegfeld, NYC
Super Panavision 70. Restored version. Shown generally i 70mm magnetic and in 35mm DTS and Dolby Digital. 70mm DTS was test.
Independence Day
19.09.1996
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
Super 35
Vertigo
04.10.1996
Ziegfeld, NYC
VistaVision. Restored version
Star Wars
22.03.1997
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
Anamorphic. The 70mm print was shown two days and returned to Lucas Film.
The Lost World
12.09.1997
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
35mm widescreen image was blown up to full frame 70mm
Titanic
17.12.1997
Manns Chinese, Hollywood
Super 35. At least 12 70mm prints were struck at DeLuxe
Tomorrow Never Dies
19.12.1997
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
Anamorphic. Nobody does it better in 70mm DTS!
Mulan
05.06.1998
Hollywood Bowl
Widescreen. Not generally released in 70mm DTS
Armageddon
17.07.1998
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
Also opened August 5, in London in 70mm DTS
Godzilla
18.09.1998
Spektrum, Oslo, Norway
-
A Trip To Mars (S)
17.04.1999.
Todd-AO, Stage A
30 frames per second SimEx special venue film
Mercedes Car Commercial
June 1999
Screened in 70mm DTS at URC in Stuttgart
Video to 70mm. Public performance not known.
CineSpace 70
1999
Todd-AO, Stage A
CineSpace 70 Todd-AO. 30 frames per second
Blackadder Back & Forth
01.01.2000
Millenium Dome, London, England
Super 35
The Good Ship Citizen
01.01.2000
Millenium Dome, London, England
Running time 3 - 5 minutes
Reach for the Sky May 2000 Millenium Dome, London, England Advert. Running time 3 minutes
Advert for Blackadder Back & Forth May 2000 Millenium Dome, London, England Comic Relief ad showing "Baldrick" promoting the book on the making of "Blackadder Back & Forth". Running time: 30 seconds
Dinosaur 12.11.2000 Siebu Dome outside Tokyo, Japan Just one 70mm print, one performance and a DP75
Fanny´s Wedding xx.xx.2000 France Short subject
Pearl Harbour 21.06.2001 Siebu Dome outside Tokyo, Japan Just one 70mm print, one performance and a DP75 in 8 (eight) channel 70mm DTS.
Patton 16.11.2001 Samuel Goldwyn Theatre, LA, CA, USA
Playtime 19.05.2002 Palais de Festival, Cannes, France Released theatrically July 3, 2002.
Lawrence of Arabia 20.09.2002 Cinerama Dome, LA, USA
Hello, Dolly! 26.08.2002 Samuel Goldwyn Theatre, LA, CA, USA
Lord Jim 26.08.2002 Samuel Goldwyn Theatre, LA, CA, USA
The Sound of Music 21.03.2003 Egyptian Theatre, Hollywood, USA
It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World 16.10.2003 The Cinerama Dome, Hollywood, USA
A Year Along the Abandoned Road 2003 - New 2003 70mm prints of the 1989 title. Lab: Gullivier, France.
Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines 2004
The Agony and the Ecstacy 2005
Doctor Dollittle 2005
The Miracle of Todd-AO 2005
To Be Alive 2005
South Pacific 11.03.2006 Pictureville, UK
The March of Todd-AO 11.03.2006 Pictureville, UK
Cleopatra 15.05.2006
STAR! 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic